80 Percent of Americans Work 'After Hours,' Equaling an Extra Day of Work Per Week: Has Recession Forced Fewer to Work More?
Fef
2012/07/02 21:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
218 votes
|
|
85% | |||
|
39 votes
|
|
15% | |||
The recession and slow recovery have kept unemployment above 8 percent. Employers refuse to hire new employees in times of uncertainty. Many employers have laid off or reduced their workforce to avoid bankruptcy during the recession. Has this led to fewer employees working harder and longer hours?
Techcrunch reporter Sarah Perez reveals how 80% of the workforce works longer hours equaling an extra day of work per week. Do you think the recession has forced fewer employees to work more hours?
Techcrunch reporter Sarah Perez reveals how 80% of the workforce works longer hours equaling an extra day of work per week. Do you think the recession has forced fewer employees to work more hours?
Read More: http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/02/80-of-americans-w...
![[VIDEO] Flying Drone With Handgun: Protected by Second Amendment?](http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003754845/Drone-Gun-Video-111595454537_large.png "[VIDEO] Flying Drone With Handgun: Protected by Second Amendment?")
And I think it will only get worse as we lose leverage as workers to employers.
it will be take it or leave it, lucky to have a job.
The marketplace of barter and cash for work performed is growing. Small businesses remaining that have not been destroyed by the banks and government edict are hanging on by a thread, afraid to hire new employees, citing the costs of the Affordable Care Act and the intrusion of the new IRS regulators in their businesses.
Look at the requirements of ACA alone. The new IRS regulations under that act to enforce the penalty provisions are the most intrusive ever. New agents, 17,000 of them, will have to justify their existence by bullying small business AND their employees, levying fines and penalties on the slightest pretense. OSHA has done this for years, forcing any small business unlucky enough to be in the way of an overzealous bureaucrat out of business because they can't afford to fight
{Example: a small contractor working on a small remodeling project recently was cited by OSHA because his employee plugged an electrical cord into a socket just inside the door of the building to do some work on the exterior. The regulator said the contractor should have installed a temporary electrical service outside. Fine: $60,000. He closed his doors, laid off his 5 employees, and went to work for a large contractor. Yes, he could have fought the fine and probably won, but the legal fees would have been at least as much as the fine, putting him out of business anyway. }
But more important if i believed your story, which i don't, like my mother always said, " A hard head makes a soft behind"
But i bet if some one was building your house, i bet you would want all those building codes and regulations, that i am willing to bet on.
Also, from this article: http://www.usatoday.com/money...
"In 2010, House Ways and Means Committee Republicans issued a report saying the IRS may need as many as 16,500 additional auditors, agents and other employees "to investigate and collect billions in new taxes from Americans."
As far as the contractor goes, that is just one example of the way the federal agents of many branches bully small businesses. They don't go after the larger ones that have the lawyers and financial capacity to fight. That small contractor (btw, a black man) was in compliance with the OSHA and all safety laws. If he had been able to afford the fight, he could have won in court, but the feds know that money and power always win.
So what's the answer? I'm not sure but I have some questions to ponder. About 100 years ago, a standard work week expectation was around 60 hours. Is there really anything special about calling 40 hours a standard work week? An additional thought - companies have qualified an increasing number of employees as 'exempt' (supposedly management and/or sales) in yet the reality of these positions is that to keep their positions these employees are virtually required to spend 50 or more hours at their jobs. Is it time to re-examine our guidelines for overtime eligibility? And a final thought - Americans get dismal vacation allowances compared to most peer OECD countries...Can we lear...
So what's the answer? I'm not sure but I have some questions to ponder. About 100 years ago, a standard work week expectation was around 60 hours. Is there really anything special about calling 40 hours a standard work week? An additional thought - companies have qualified an increasing number of employees as 'exempt' (supposedly management and/or sales) in yet the reality of these positions is that to keep their positions these employees are virtually required to spend 50 or more hours at their jobs. Is it time to re-examine our guidelines for overtime eligibility? And a final thought - Americans get dismal vacation allowances compared to most peer OECD countries...Can we learn from the 'happiest countries in the world' aka Denmark, Sweden and Norway where standard vacation allowances start at 4 weeks in addition to liberal job sharing, holiday and other time off policies?
Productivity has increased much more than salaries over the last 40 years.
Productivity gains are realized in dollars. Where are the dollars going?
Executive pay, profits and dividends.